<?php
/**
 * <https://y.st./>
 * Copyright © 2019 Alex Yst <mailto:copyright@y.st>
 * 
 * This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
 * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
 * the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
 * (at your option) any later version.
 * 
 * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
 * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
 * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
 * GNU General Public License for more details.
 * 
 * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
 * along with this program. If not, see <https://www.gnu.org./licenses/>.
**/

$xhtml = array(
	'<{title}>' => 'I don&apos;t have time for this!',
	'takedown' => '2017-11-01',
	'<{body}>' => <<<END
<img src="/img/CC_BY-SA_4.0/y.st./weblog/2019/06/26.jpg" alt="Celosia flowers" class="framed-centred-image" width="800" height="480"/>
<section id="diet">
	<h2>Dietary intake</h2>
	<p>
		For breakfast, I had 59 grams of cereal and 109 grams of soy milk.
		For lunch, I had 302 grams of salsa and 142 grams of corn chips.
		For dinner, I had 325 grams of spaghetti, chopped breakfast sausage, and cashew sauce.
	</p>
</section>
<section id="Minetest">
	<h2>Minetest</h2>
	<img src="/img/CC_BY-SA_3.0/minetest.net./weblog/2019/06/26.png" alt="The first checkpoint node with metadata" class="framed-centred-image" width="1024" height="600"/>
	<p>
		I tweaked my checkpoint design to spread the torches out a bit.
		This was only possible by making the texture 24 pixels wide instead of the usual 16, then setting the texture&apos;s visual scale to 150%.
		Most of the texture is just empty, transparent space though, and the texture is run along the diagonal of the node instead of along the side, so it doesn&apos;t look like the texture is actually as large as it is.
	</p>
	<p>
		I&apos;ve also gotten the initial metadata system for checkpoints set up.
		Checkpoint metadata can&apos;t be stored in the node itself, because the node might not be loaded when someone needs to warp there, and because we need a way to find the checkpoint nodes to begin with without literally checking every node in the game world to see if it&apos;s a checkpoint.
		Instead, checkpoint metadata is stored using mod storage, a feature Minetest uses to allow mods to have their own key/value stores without modders having to reimplement persistent key/value storage in each and every mod that needs it.
		Zero will potentially have more nodes in need of such key/value storage though, so all checkpoint-related keys begin with <code>checkpoint;</code>.
		Other nodes can use other prefixes, but the prefixes must always end in a semicolon and not contain other semicolons, effectively dividing the namespace.
	</p>
	<p>
		Checkpoints don&apos;t work yet.
		They only set up their metadata when placed and remove their metadata when broken.
		The metadata at the moment only contains an integer representing the element the checkpoint belongs to and a list of players that are allowed to use that checkpoint, though I&apos;ll probably add a checkpoint name to the metadata very soon.
		As for the list of players, it&apos;s always empty because there&apos;s currently no way for players to grab a checkpoint.
		So they&apos;re useless for the time being.
		I think they&apos;ll be the second node I complete though, with the first being the already-complete compressed nodes.
	</p>
</section>
<section id="flies">
	<h2>Fruit flies</h2>
	<p>
		This past week, I keep finding fruit flies in my home.
		What do they even want here!?
		As I mentioned before, my mother kept bringing me moth infestations before.
		I&apos;m not in the middle of a moth outbreak at the moment, but because of the moths, I&apos;ve hid most of my food in the refrigerator and freezer where they can&apos;t get it.
		What isn&apos;t in there is in cans and jars, and moths can&apos;t get into those either.
		But while I didn&apos;t specifically hide my food from flies, hiding it from the moths keeps it where the flies cant get it either.
		I don&apos;t know what food they must be finding to get them to stay, but they&apos;re landing on all my utencils and stuff, which is nasty.
	</p>
	<p>
		Summer used to leave out dishes of vinegar for them.
		They&apos;d land in the vinegar to eat it, but then get stuck and drown in it.
		They say you can&apos;t catch flies with vinegar, but that&apos;s utter garbage.
		Do you know what vinegar is?
		It&apos;s literally made of rotten fruit.
		You know what likes rotten fruit?
		Fruit flies.
		And probably most other types of fly too.
	</p>
	<p>
		So anyway, I got fed up with trying to catch all the flies by hand, so last night, I set out a dish of vinegar for them.
		In the morning, there were far more flies gathered on the dish than I&apos;d seen so far.
		The vinegar certainly lured them out of hiding, but only two of them has actually taken a dip.
		I wasn&apos;t catching most of them.
		I was just feeding them.
		I don&apos;t know how Summer made it work, but I clearly was getting the exact opposite of the results I wanted.
	</p>
	<p>
		I needed to go deposit my pay cheque, return bottles for deposit, and mainly just do a little bit of biking today to keep with my exercise goal, so while I was out, I bought fruit fly traps.
		So far, they haven&apos;t caught anything.
		But the only fruit fly I saw near the one, I sucked up with a vacuum cleaner, so maybe that one would have been caught if I&apos;d been more patient.
	</p>
	<p>
		Speaking of the vacuum cleaner, I&apos;ve got a couple lying around that I didn&apos;t know if even functioned.
		They were gifts from people trying to clear out space, and as my carpeted area is inhabited by Summer&apos;s boxes, I haven&apos;t been able to clean in there.
		When I want to clean the linoleum in the other rooms, I just pull out my broom.
		The one vacuum cleaner appears to work just fine.
		It shoots out a lot of hot air though.
		Maybe it&apos;s got an overheating problem?
		I don&apos;t know.
		But I spent at least a good hour sucking up flies with it, and I haven&apos;t seen so many around since.
		I guess I&apos;ll see tomorrow if the population has gone down and if the remaining flies are interested in the traps.
	</p>
</section>
<section id="drudgery">
	<h2>Drudgery</h2>
	<p>
		My discussion post for the day:
	</p>
	<blockquote>
		<p>
			You make a good point about mobile devices having a variety of form factors.
			However, I think your dismissal of laptop form factors is a bit off.
			I used to work on a very small laptop, before the thing started having terrible overheating problems, and it seemed to be a smaller size than some websites expected.
			These websites used fixed-width layouts (fixed-width layouts are <strong>*always*</strong> a bad idea and should be avoided) that required horizontal scrolling on my tiny screen.
			The first thing to take from this is that laptops do come in a variety of sizes, and not everyone accounts for them.
			That doesn&apos;t mean those sizes aren&apos;t out there.
		</p>
		<p>
			Secondly though, I think a big issue with mobile size factors relate to sheer percentages at that scale.
			For example, take a laptop screen.
			Now shave two centimetres off the side to imagine another form factor.
			You can still fit most of the same content on the screen though, right?
			But try doing the same with a mobile screen.
			Shave a couple centimetres off of that.
			It makes a huge difference.
			You might have just lost twenty percent of your available space!
			When you&apos;ve got less space, the space you have matters more.
			Designs built to assume a certain screen size will fail when the assumed size is off by that high of a ratio.
		</p>
		<p>
			Like you said, fluid designs are the key to dealing with multiple screen sizes.
			This applies to more than just mobiles though, and more than just screen sizes.
			For example, even the user of a desktop computer with an impressive monitor size may not browse the Web with a full-screen window.
			They may want to be able to multitask, and have several windows visible; one for Web, one for email, one for that $a[GIMP] project they&apos;re working on ... et cetera.
			Even with a huge screen size, just about any smaller window size is possible.
			A fluid design will allow for this.
			A fixed-width design will obnoxiously demand that the user dedicate more screen real estate to the browser window than is convenient for the user.
		</p>
	</blockquote>
</section>
<section id="Religion">
	<h2>Religious study</h2>
	<p>
		I really don&apos;t have time for this, but I said I&apos;d do it, so I got it done tonight.
		I went through my past journal entries and reread the parts referring to my religion.
		I was told to search through the past &quot;few&quot; months, so I could probably get away with only reading notes from this month, last month, and the month prior.
		It&apos;d technically be about two and a half months though, not the three needed to meet the bare minimum of what the word &quot;few&quot; means.
		Instead, I wanted to do this right, so I grepped the whole calendar year, giving me entries from over the past five and a half months.
	</p>
	<p>
		At first, I worked chronologically.
		I started at the beginning of the year.
		On <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2019/01-January/23.xhtml">January 23</a>, the missionaries stopped by after apparently having blown off an appointment and dropping off the $a[radar] for a bit.
		Curious as to what was going on, I went back further, and found that on <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2018/12-December/15.xhtml">December 15</a>, they&apos;d missed the appointment a week an a half prior, an I gave up waiting on them.
		On <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2018/12-December/12.xhtml">December 12</a>, they&apos;d missed their appointment by a week, but I&apos;d assumed that they&apos;d miscommunicated their preferred date, and that they&apos;d show up that day.
		They didn&apos;t.
		That same day, the person from the cult wrote me back, saying a Eugene chapter was open.
		They passed my information to a local member, if I recall, and that member was supposed to contact me.
		They never did.
		I waited a while, but then got busy an didn&apos;t have time to try to get the follow-up by writing back to the member I did have contact information for.
		On <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2018/12-December/11.xhtml">December 11</a>, I passed by a Christian supply store, and curious as to what Christian supplies would be besides bibles, I stopped in to take a look.
		There, I saw a proverb that didn&apos;t sit right with me.
		Paraphrasing would do my past self&apos;s thoughts justice, so I&apos;ll just quote them here:
	</p>
	<blockquote cite="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2018/12-December/11.xhtml">
		<blockquote>
			<p>
				Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. ~ Proverbs 35
			</p>
		</blockquote>
		<p>
			Um.
			Wow.
			My interpretation of this is that one isn&apos;t to seek knowledge and understanding, but to instead just put their trust in some unknowable being with motives he doesn&apos;t even explain to you.
			You&apos;re asked to blindly follow with no way to know that his reasoning is good, let alone that his motives are in your best interest.
			I mean, it&apos;s pretty consistent with the rest of what Christianity teaches, but I&apos;m both surprised and disappointed that people can read that and accept it as somehow a good thing.
			It worries me that people can&apos;t see such a blunt display of how Christianity is just a tool to control the masses.
			Of course, I&apos;m pretty sure most if not all religion is, but Christianity&apos;s the popular religion in my part of the world, so it&apos;s the religion everyone gets smacked with on a regular basis regardless of what they believe.
		</p>
	</blockquote>
	<p>
		On <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2018/12-December/08.xhtml">December 8</a>, I was watching atheist media after having been stood up by the missionaries.
		It reminded me of many of the questions I&apos;d forgotten.
		Several of these questions don&apos;t seem relevant in the context of Mormanism, such as why a loving god would send people to eternal torture for not believing obvious falsehoods that somehow turn out to be true, but still, the Mormon Elohim and Jesus do expect you to believe without evidence or you don&apos;t get to go to the best heaven.
		You have to spend eternity in a lesser heaven.
		It&apos;s not eternal torture, and from the sounds of it, it&apos;s far from it.
		But it&apos;s still an eternal punishment, even if it&apos;s not intended to be framed that way.
		The fact that if your sins are simply erased, you&apos;re not really you any more was also made, and is hugely important, but is again irrelevant to the Mormon religion due to their concept of &quot;eternal progression&quot; instead of instant purification.
		And on <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2018/12-December/01.xhtml">December 1</a>, the missionaries stood me up.
		This hadn&apos;t been the first time.
		But this was a time when it happened.
		Yet on December 12, I was expecting them to show up exactly a week late due to assumed miscommunication on their part, which means that there was an appointment on December 5 too that went undocumented.
		I probably left it out due to giving them leeway, assuming they&apos;d miscommunicated and would be there the next week.
		They missed two appointments in a row with absolutely zero communication that they couldn&apos;t make it, and disappeared for over a month.
		Wow.
		I&apos;d forgotten that.
	</p>
	<p>
		Back to moving forward, on <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2019/01-January/25.xhtml">January 25</a>, I realised I couldn&apos;t simply bring the Book of Mormon with me places and read it in my spare scraps of time.
		Why not?
		Because without my laptop, I couldn&apos;t keep sufficient notes to track my thoughts on the book.
		Without the laptop, no reading of the Book of Mormon could occur.
		Some reading of the book did occur later that day, but nothing worth mentioning here happened.
		On <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2019/01-January/26.xhtml">January 26</a>, I thought about the Adam and Eve story.
		My thoughts back then still sum up what I feel now:
	</p>
	<blockquote cite="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2019/01-January/26.xhtml">
		<p>
			I was thinking about the Adam and Eve story again today.
			The Mormons say that to disobey a commandment from Yahweh is a sin.
			Yahweh gave Adam and Eve two commandments: reproduce and don&apos;t eat the forbidden fruit.
			He made sure they had no idea how to reproduce without eating the fruit, which would give them that knowledge, among knowledge of other things.
			In other words, if they didn&apos;t sin by eating the fruit, they&apos;d sin by not eating the fruit.
			There was absolutely no way for them to win.
			And of course, when they sinned, their immortality was stripped and they were booted from the Garden of Eden to live difficult lives.
			What a cruel god the Mormon version of Yahweh is.
			I mean, pretty much every version of Yahweh is cruel, but the Mormons try to make their version out as softer and kinder.
			It&apos;d be one thing to simply put them into a difficult life, but to give them impossible-to-follow orders and then punish them for disobedience is crossing a line.
		</p>
	</blockquote>
	<p>
		On <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2019/01-January/27.xhtml">January 27</a>, the reading material painted Elohim as conceited, but because the Mormons call their three gods &quot;god&quot; instead of referring to them by name, I thought it was referring to Yahweh (Jesus).
		On <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2019/01-January/28.xhtml">January 28</a>, I read about Jesus&apos; &quot;follow me without proof I even exist or I&apos;ll smite you&quot; attitude, and I saw the first hints of a straw man argument forming in the Book of Mormon.
		On <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2019/01-January/29.xhtml">January 29</a>, I read about plates that might have ended up with Joseph Smith, but I&apos;m not even sure.
		They held old bible books and some genealogical information.
		On <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2019/01-January/30.xhtml">January 30</a>, the Book of Mormon had nothing noteworthy to say.
	</p>
	<p>
		On <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2019/01-January/31.xhtml">January 31</a>, I learned that the wicked will be cast off forever.
		No forgiveness for them, even if they change.
		Also, someone (probably Nephi) saw a vision and could tell someone was a virgin by looking at them.
		Y&apos;know, because virginity&apos;s totally a trait that can be seen just by looking at someone.
		Also, the Book of Mormon tells us that diseases are caused by unclean spirits, not pathogens.
		Science begs to differ.
		Also on this date, I made plans with the missionaries both to start attending church and to get baptised.
		The missionaries didn&apos;t inform me of <strong>*any*</strong> of the necessary information about getting baptised.
		First of all, they didn&apos;t tell me that being baptised necessarily makes me a member of their church.
		I was in no way prepared to join the church yet.
		Secondly, they didn&apos;t tell me that getting baptised requires one to be on the special Mormon diet.
		It turns out I was already on their diet without knowing it, but they didn&apos;t know what I eat either.
		There could be more I don&apos;t know about baptism that they should have told me before trying to sign me up too.
		I mean, I only learned about the diet thing this week.
	</p>
	<p>
		On <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2019/02-February/01.xhtml">February 1</a>, I read about the us-versus-them mentality of the church in the Book of Mormon.
		Elohim and Satan are both evil though.
		I side with neither of them.
		But according to the book, eveyone sides with one or the other, without exception.
		I also bought a shirt to wear to church that day, as I didn&apos;t have one I thought would be presentable in that environment.
		On <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2019/02-February/02.xhtml">February 2</a>, I discussed both the mild dread and morbid curiosity I got whenever thinking about my upcoming baptism.
		On <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2019/02-February/03.xhtml">February 3</a>, I attended church for the first time, where someone I introduced myself to thought that I&apos;d called myself &quot;Alice&quot;.
		I was flattered that they thought that I could even be an &quot;Alice&quot;.
		It was a day when people from the congregation got up and made unbacked claims about Jesus and Elohim; in retrospect, it was Fast Sunday.
		The missionaries wanted to meet that Thursday, but it was the day of my surgery, so I had to decline.
		They said they&apos;d contact me later in the week.
		They never did.
		I&apos;d also been praying about the surgery during this time period.
		On <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2019/02-February/04.xhtml">February 4</a>, the characters in the Book of Mormon continued to make no sense in their actions and motivations, and I discussed how baptism wasn&apos;t sounding like a good idea to me.
		On <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2019/02-February/05.xhtml">February 5</a>, I finished the first book of Nephi, which concluded with Elohim being conceited again, and telling an unknown person that they existed solely to glorify him.
	</p>
	<p>
		On <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2019/02-February/06.xhtml">January 6</a>, the second book of Nephi tried to assemble backwards logic and bizarre claims into an argument that &quot;proves&quot; the existance of Jesus.
		Or Elohim.
		I&apos;m unclear on which because the Mormons don&apos;t call these people by their actual names most of the time, an instead use a shared title to refer to both.
		In any case, this argument was all in one verse, so as convoluted as it was, it was very short.
		I wrote six whole paragraphs just on that one verse though.
		That&apos;s how densely-packed the garbage was in that verse.
	</p>
	<p>
		On <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2019/02-February/07.xhtml">February 7</a>, I read a prophecy that the Book of Mormon would come to be.
		The problem?
		The prophecy was in the Book of Mormon itself.
		It doesn&apos;t in any way prove that Joseph Smith didn&apos;t make the whole thing up.
		He could easily include an &quot;ancient&quot; prophecy predicting the book, and include it in the book itself.
		On <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2019/02-February/08.xhtml">February 8</a>, I learned that the Mormons believe black people to be the cursed descendants of the Lamanites, and that interbreeding with the blacks isn&apos;t advisable because your children too will inherit their curse.
		On <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2019/02-February/09.xhtml">February 9</a>, I thought about how the Mormons claim everyone can be forgiven, and wondered where forgiveness for Satan comes in.
		On <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2019/02-February/10.xhtml">February 10</a>, a surmon in church made the claim that if you help yourself, that&apos;s actually Jesus helping you.
		On <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2019/02-February/11.xhtml">February 11</a>, I decided to ask the missionaries about Jesus and Yahweh, as the Book of Mormon claimed them to be one and the same.
		Eventually, this line of thought would lead to the revaluation that in Mormonism, Elohim takes the usual place of Yahweh in the trinity, while Jesus and Yahweh are the same person.
		On <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2019/02-February/12.xhtml">February 12</a>, I read about an angel removing the sins of someone by touching their lips with a live coal.
		On <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2019/02-February/13.xhtml">February 13</a>, I learned that a diet of butter and honey is what grants someone a moral compass, according to the Book of Mormon.
		Also, Immanuel is going to be born from a virgin mother.
		Is Immanuel another name for Jesus?
		I think I forgot to ask.
	</p>
	<p>
		On <a href="/y.st./source/y.st./source/pages/en/weblog/2019/02-February/14.xhtml">February 14</a>, I realised I needed a separate page for notes on the Book of Mormon, so this was my final day of keeping my thoughts on it in my main journal entries.
		Thank Squiddy for that.
		No more reading though Book of Mormon notes tonight.
		Also, I learned that Jesse might also be Jesus, and that the Mormons prefer the name Jehovah over the name Yahweh.
	</p>
	<p>
		At this point though, I had to throw in the towel.
		I don&apos;t have time to keep reading my own thoughts right now.
		I have coursework in need of doing.
		I&apos;ll probably continue later, after seeing the missionaries tomorrow.
	</p>
</section>
END
);
